Top 15 Alva Labs Alternatives and Competitors

Alva Labs is a Stockholm-built hiring platform that screens candidates with an adaptive logic test and a Five-Factor personality test, then pushes the scores into your ATS. Both tests are DNV-certified, take about 15 minutes each, and the candidate sees the same report the recruiter sees. If you hire mostly on general ability and personality, and you already run Greenhouse, Lever or Teamtailor, it is a tidy fit.

So here is the short answer. The best alternatives to Alva Labs keep the psychometrics and add what Alva leaves out: role-specific skills tests, coding tasks you can watch being solved, AI-led video and phone interviews, proctoring, and a price you can read before you book a demo. Testlify leads this list because it does all five on one published plan. The other 14 tools each win a narrower case, and we say which.

Every price below was read from the vendor's live pricing page in September 2026. Where a vendor hides pricing behind a sales call, we say "quote-based" and leave it there. Alva Labs is one of those vendors.

TL;DR

• Alva Labs is strong at one thing: a short, adaptive logic and personality screen that drops into 250+ ATS and HR systems. It does not publish pricing, its coding test is a 60 to 90 minute take-home, and its interview product is a guide for human interviewers, not an AI interviewer.
• Switch when you need role skills (Excel, SQL, a customer email), coding in a real editor, AI video or phone interviews, webcam proctoring, or a price you can budget for without a demo.
• Testlify is the strongest all-round alternative: 3,500+ tests, 25+ question types, AI video and phone interviews, three proctoring presets, and a Starter plan at $139 a month billed annually.
• Coding-only tools (Codility, HackerRank, HackerEarth, Coderbyte) and quote-based enterprise suites (Mercer Mettl, iMocha, HireVue, Vervoe) suit specific teams, not a 60-person agency hiring account managers.
• Stay with Alva if your whole process is two psychometric tests inside Teamtailor or Greenhouse and your legal team wants a DNV certificate on the box. Nothing else on this list is certified the same way.

What is Alva Labs?

Alva Labs is a candidate assessment platform founded in Stockholm in 2017 and used, by its own count, by 650+ organisations. It sells four things: a logic test, a personality test, a coding test and a structured interview kit, all feeding one "Role Fit" score that lands in your ATS.

The two psychometric tests are the core. The logic test is adaptive: 20 tasks, a 2-minute window per task, most people done in 15 to 20 minutes. Alva scores it with Bayesian methods on a single calibrated scale, so there are no norm groups to pick. The personality test is built on the Five-Factor Model, adapts using Item Response Theory, and takes 12 to 15 minutes. Both carry a DNV certification, and the personality test is certified to ISO 10667-2. Candidates own their results and can reuse them with another employer.

The coding test is newer and different in shape. Candidates work in their own environment on a GitHub-based challenge that Alva says was designed by engineers from Stripe and Spotify, in Python, JavaScript, TypeScript, React, Java "and more", and most take 60 to 90 minutes. The structured interview product generates situational questions, scoring anchors and guidance for the humans running the interview. It does not run the interview itself.

Integrations are a real strength. Alva lists 250+ ATS and HR systems, with Greenhouse, Lever, SmartRecruiters, Jobvite, Teamtailor and Jobylon named up front, and its model is explicit: the ATS stays the system of record and Alva sits on top as a decision layer.

How much does Alva Labs cost?

Alva Labs does not publish prices. Its site offers "Book a demo" and nothing else, and the pricing URL returned a 404 when we checked in September 2026. Software directories print numbers for it, but they disagree with each other by a wide margin and none is confirmed by Alva, so treat them as guesses. For a team of 40 that wants to know the cost before a sales call, that is the first reason to look at this list.

Why do teams look for Alva Labs alternatives?

Because two good psychometric tests are not a hiring process. Five reasons come up again and again.

No role-specific skills tests. Alva's catalog is logic, personality, coding and interview guides. If you need a bookkeeper to reconcile a spreadsheet, a support hire to answer an angry customer, or an SDR to write a cold email, you are building that elsewhere. The 2022 Sackett, Zhang, Berry and Lievens re-analysis in the Journal of Applied Psychology put job knowledge tests at an operational validity of .40 and work samples at .33, against .31 for cognitive ability, as reported by SIOP. A logic score alone leaves the job-knowledge signal on the table.

The coding test is a take-home. Sixty to ninety minutes in the candidate's own environment is fine for a senior backend role. It is slow for screening 80 applicants, and you cannot see how the candidate worked, only what they shipped. Alternatives run coding in an embedded editor with test cases, timing, and a record of the session.

No AI interviewer and no video. Alva's interview product supports human interviews only. There is no one-way video question, no conversational AI interview, and no phone screen. For a team hiring 30 support agents a quarter, that is the stage that eats calendar time.

Proctoring is not the pitch. Alva's product pages we read talk about adaptive difficulty, fairness and transparent reporting, not webcam checks, tab monitoring or AI-assistance detection. For a personality inventory that is fine. For a logic test taken at home that decides who gets an interview, you want evidence you can review.

Pricing is a demo away. Every quote-based vendor on this list gets the same Con, and Alva gets it too.

The honest counterpoint: if your process is "logic plus personality, inside Teamtailor, for Nordic office roles", Alva is built for exactly that, the certification is real, and the candidate experience is short and clean. Switch for what is missing, not for what is there.

How did we evaluate these Alva Labs alternatives?

We scored each tool against the buyer who actually searches for Alva Labs alternatives: a company of 20 to 200 people, often an agency, a professional-services firm or a scale-up, where the founder or one operations lead owns hiring and does not do it full time. Five criteria, in order of weight:

1. Test breadth beyond psychometrics. Cognitive and personality tests plus role skills, software tasks and coding, so one tool covers the whole shortlist.
2. Coding and work samples you can observe. An embedded editor with test cases beats a take-home for screening; a take-home beats nothing.
3. Interviewing inside the tool. One-way video, conversational AI, or phone screens that a human reviews afterwards.
4. Anti-cheating with a human on the flag. Webcam snapshots, tab-switch detection and an AI-assistance flag, with a person deciding what a flag means.
5. Published pricing and a real trial. Quote-based pricing is a Con on this list. A small team should know the cost before booking a demo.

This is the Testlify Multi-Signal Talent Evaluation Model applied to a buying decision: combine several role-relevant signals (assessment, work sample, interview, references) rather than trusting one logic score, and pick the platform that can collect the most of those signals without a second subscription.

How do the Alva Labs alternatives compare?

1. Testlify

Testlify is a skills assessment and AI interviewing platform that covers what Alva sells (logic, personality, coding) and what it does not (role-specific skills, software tasks, AI interviews, proctoring) in one subscription. It is built for the team that wants one shortlist score across several signals rather than one cognitive percentile.

Key features

• 3,500+ tests and 25+ question types. The test library spans cognitive ability, personality and culture, psychometric, situational judgement, software skills, coding and blue-collar roles. Question types include coding in an embedded VS Code editor with up to 20 test cases, typing, file upload and live Google Docs, Sheets, Slides, Word, Excel and PowerPoint tasks. A "vibe coding" question lets candidates direct AI tools to a working solution, which almost no rival tests for.
• AI video, audio and phone interviews. One-way and two-way conversational formats with selectable AI avatars and voices, custom prompts, attempt and recording-time limits, preparation time before auto-start, automatic multilingual transcripts and AI scoring you can keep advisory. Phone interviews bill at $0.18 per minute. This is the stage Alva hands back to your calendar.
• Proctoring with three presets. Standard, Strict or Custom: webcam snapshots, tab-switch and multi-monitor detection, AI-tool detection, photo ID with face match, and dual-device monitoring that turns the candidate's phone into a second camera. Face verification data is deleted after 30 days.
• Item-level psychometrics. Difficulty index, discrimination index and quality-risk flags per question, so you can see which items actually separate strong candidates from weak ones.
• Custom questions and AI-built assessments. Paste a job description and get a draft assessment of up to 20 questions, then edit it. Any question can be weighted, made mandatory or left unscored, and tests translate in real time into the candidate's preferred language.

Pros

• Psychometrics and job skills in one credit pool, with real-time translation for a multilingual applicant pool.
• The product ships the line "AI scores and insights are for guidance only. Use human judgment for final decisions," and you can exclude AI scores from the final average. That is the human-oversight evidence a European compliance review asks for.
• A simple built-in hiring pipeline (job posting, application form, applied to shortlisted stages) for teams without an ATS, plus 100+ ATS integrations for teams that have one.

Cons

• Candidates need a Chromium desktop browser (Chrome or Edge) for a full assessment; the mobile app is a recording fallback, not a test-taking platform. Alva runs on any device.
• ATS integrations, white labeling and SSO are paid add-ons on the self-serve tiers ($2,388 a year each for ATS integrations and white labeling).
• No third-party certificate such as DNV on the psychometric tests. Testlify's cognitive and personality reports are its own.

Best for

A company under 200 people, an agency or a professional-services firm that hires across account management, ops, support and a few technical roles and wants one platform for all of them.

Pricing

Published on the pricing page. Annual billing: Starter $139 a month ($1,668 a year, 100 credits, 3 seats), Basic $279 a month ($3,348 a year, 300 credits), Business $699 a month ($8,388 a year, 1,000 credits). Premium, Enterprise and Custom are quote-based. One credit per started assessment. 7-day free trial with no card, 30-day money-back guarantee, and a 25% non-profit discount.

2. TestGorilla

TestGorilla is the closest like-for-like alternative in shape: a large off-the-shelf library, a free tier and published pricing. It is the tool many small teams try first, because the free plan costs nothing to evaluate.

Key features

• 350+ tests on paid plans across cognitive ability, personality, language, software skills and role skills.
• Video questions, AI interviews on the Plus tier, resume scoring and qualifying questions.
• Free plan with 10 credits a month, 5 essential tests, 5 preset custom questions and one full-access seat.

Pros

• You can run a real pilot for $0.
• Pricing is public and predictable.

Cons

• The free plan limits you to 5 tests, so the pilot does not show the full library.
• ATS integrations, custom tests and coding challenges sit on the Plus tier, which starts at $400 a month on an annual commitment.

Best for

Teams that want to test the category before spending, and are hiring mostly non-technical roles.

Pricing

Free plan at $0. Core $142 a month on an annual commitment ($1,704 billed annually). Plus from $400 a month ($4,800 a year). Enterprise is quote-based.

3. Adaface

Adaface delivers assessments as a chat conversation with "Ada" instead of a wall of multiple-choice questions, and sells credits in small packs. For a team hiring five people a year, the entry price is hard to beat.

Key features

• 500+ tests covering programming, data, IT, accounting, finance, aptitude, psychometric, language and typing.
• Conversational delivery that adapts question difficulty as the candidate answers.
• Credit-based plans where one credit equals one candidate invite, refunded if unused.

Pros

• The Individual plan at $180 a year for 12 credits is the cheapest paid entry point on this list.
• Every plan includes the full library.

Cons

• Twelve credits is one small role. Costs climb to $3,000 a year at 500 credits, and credits expire after a year.
• The chat format is distinctive, and not every hiring manager wants a quirky candidate experience for a finance role.

Best for

Very low-volume hiring where candidate experience matters more than volume tooling.

Pricing

Individual $180 a year (12 credits), Starter $500 (50), Pro $900 (100), Scale $3,000 (500), Growth $5,500 (1,000), Enterprise $20,000 (5,000), Unlimited $50,000. 14-day free trial.

4. Vervoe

Vervoe's pitch is merit over resumes: candidates complete job simulations and AI ranks the responses. It is a work-sample tool first and a test library second, which suits roles where the task is the test (support, sales, marketing).

Key features

• Job simulations mixing text, video, file uploads and spreadsheet tasks.
• AI grading and ranking of open-ended responses, with team review and notes.
• Positioned for "skills-first hiring at scale."

Pros

• Strong on realistic tasks, the work-sample signal that scored .33 in the 2022 re-analysis and that a logic-plus-personality stack lacks.
• Collaborative review keeps the decision with people.

Cons

• Pricing is request-only as of September 2026, so you cannot compare cost without a demo.
• Thin on the certified cognitive and personality measures an Alva buyer is used to.

Best for

Mid-size teams hiring frontline and go-to-market roles where a realistic exercise beats a personality profile.

Pricing

Quote-based. The pricing page offers "Request pricing" and a demo booking; no plan figures are published.

5. Codility

Codility is an engineering assessment platform, full stop. If your open roles are all developers, it replaces Alva's take-home with timed, auto-scored tasks and live technical interviews. If they are not, most of what you pay for goes unused.

Key features

• Coding tasks with automated scoring, plus live collaborative technical interviews.
• Basic proctoring on Starter, premium proctoring and SSO on Custom.
• Skills Intelligence analytics on the Custom tier.

Pros

• Published entry pricing, unusual for engineering-focused vendors.
• Built for structured, repeatable technical hiring.

Cons

• No personality, cognitive or non-technical role tests, so it replaces only one of Alva's four products.
• Starter includes 1 platform user and 120 invites a year; trials are scoped through sales rather than self-serve.

Best for

Software teams that hire engineers steadily and want a dedicated coding pipeline.

Pricing

Starter $1,200 a year (120 invite credits, 1 user), Scale $6,000 a year (300 credits, 3 users, monthly option available), Custom quote-based.

6. Mercer Mettl

Mercer Mettl is the enterprise psychometrics-and-proctoring suite on this list, used for corporate hiring, campus drives and certification exams. It is the alternative that feels most like Alva's research rigor, at enterprise scale and with an enterprise sales motion.

Key features

• Psychometric, behavioral, cognitive and domain assessments plus coding tests.
• Proctoring options including AI monitoring and human invigilators.
• Branding, custom subdomains and percentile benchmarks.

Pros

• Depth in behavioral assessment and secure high-stakes testing.
• Part of Mercer, the HR consultancy, with a large research base behind its assessments.

Cons

• Pricing is customized per organization; the pricing page publishes no figures.
• Sales-led, which slows a 30-person firm that wants to start this week.

Best for

Large organizations running high-stakes or high-volume proctored assessments.

Pricing

Quote-based ("Customised plan as per your organisation"). A free sign-up exists, but plan prices do not appear on the site.

7. iMocha

iMocha sells skills intelligence to enterprises: a very large skills library, assessments and an AI layer that maps a workforce's skills for hiring and upskilling. The customer logos on its site are global consultancies, which tells you the target buyer.

Key features

• A skills library that stretches into niche domains such as SAP, cybersecurity and financial services.
• Custom test builder and AI-assisted interviews.
• Skills-gap analytics for learning and development as well as hiring.

Pros

• Breadth well beyond Alva's four products.
• One platform for hiring and internal upskilling.

Cons

• No public pricing; the path is a personalized demo.
• Enterprise-first packaging for a buyer that may only need 100 credits.

Best for

Enterprises with a learning-and-development mandate as well as hiring volume.

Pricing

Quote-based. The pricing page routes to "Book a Demo" and lists no plans or figures.

8. HireVue

HireVue is a video interviewing and assessment platform for high-volume enterprise hiring. It solves the problem Alva does not touch: moving thousands of applicants through structured video interviews and game-based assessments, with scheduling built in.

Key features

• On-demand and live video interviews with structured scoring.
• Game-based and AI-driven assessments and a validated interview content library.
• Scheduling automation, candidate chatbots and ATS integration.

Pros

• Proven at very high applicant volumes.
• Interviewing, scheduling and assessment in one enterprise contract.

Cons

• Two packages (Essential and Premium) with no published prices.
• Sized for enterprise budgets and procurement cycles.

Best for

Retail, hospitality and call-center employers screening thousands of applicants a quarter.

Pricing

Quote-based. The pricing page describes Essential and Premium packages and asks you to request a demo.

9. TestDome

TestDome sells work-sample skills tests by the candidate, with no subscription. You buy a pack, invite people, and the pack never expires. For a team that hires in bursts, that is the opposite of a demo-only vendor.

Key features

• Work-sample style questions across software, accounting, customer service and data entry.
• Custom questions mixed with the library.
• Automatic refunds on invites that go uncompleted within 6 days.

Pros

• Transparent per-candidate pricing from $7 to $20, packs that never expire, and auto top-up at 90% usage.
• No annual commitment.

Cons

• Light on certified personality and cognitive measures compared with Alva.
• Per-candidate pricing still scales with volume, just more gently than a seat-based enterprise deal.

Best for

Teams with lumpy, unpredictable hiring who refuse to pay a subscription in quiet months.

Pricing

Starter $20 per candidate (5 for $100), Small $16 (25 for $400), Medium $10 (100 for $1,000), Large $8 (300 for $2,400), Extra Large $7 (600 for $4,200).

10. Coderbyte

Coderbyte is a developer assessment platform aimed at startups and mid-size companies, with pricing that starts low and a Pro plan that removes candidate limits. It is coding-first, with personality testing sold as an add-on.

Key features

• Coding challenges, take-home projects, multiple-choice and SQL questions.
• Live coding interviews with a shared editor, spreadsheets and a whiteboard.
• Cheating detection and 200 video responses on Pro.

Pros

• $99 a month for 20 invites, with unused invites rolling over.
• Pro annual at $1,799 with unlimited candidates and admins.

Cons

• ATS integrations ($1,499 a year), SSO ($1,499) and personality testing ($1,199) are separate add-ons.
• Not built for non-technical roles.

Best for

Small engineering teams that want unlimited coding assessments without an enterprise contract.

Pricing

Monthly $99 for 20 invites ($20 per extra invite). Pay as you go $500 per 50 invites, valid 365 days. Pro annual $1,799. Enterprise from $12,495 a year. 14-day free trial.

11. HireMojo

HireMojo is recruiting automation, not an assessment library. It posts jobs across LinkedIn, Indeed, Glassdoor and other boards, screens applicants with a scored questionnaire and tracks them in one dashboard. It belongs on this list because some Alva searchers are really shopping for the whole hiring workflow.

Key features

• Multi-channel job distribution and a pre-sourced candidate database.
• "Mo," an AI screening assistant that scores and ranks applicants.
• Applicant tracking, resume screening and source analytics.

Pros

• Covers sourcing and screening in one place.
• Good fit for teams without a recruiter or a tracking system.

Cons

• Screening questionnaires are not validated skills or personality assessments.
• Pricing is not shown on the site; the sales team scopes a subscription.

Best for

Owner-operators who need applicants first and assessments second.

Pricing

Not published. The site offers a free demo.

12. HackerEarth

HackerEarth is a technical hiring platform that pairs coding assessments with hackathons for sourcing and a live interview tool called FaceCode. It is the alternative for a company that wants to attract developers as well as screen them.

Key features

• Skill-based coding assessments with a proctored "Smart Browser."
• FaceCode, a real-time code editor for live technical interviews.
• Public and internal hackathons for sourcing and engagement.

Pros

• Sourcing and screening in one developer-facing brand, with ISO 27001 and ISO 27017 certifications listed.
• Learning-and-development modules for the engineers you already have.

Cons

• No personality or cognitive tests, so it replaces Alva's coding product only.
• The pricing page did not render to our checker in September 2026; confirm figures directly.

Best for

Engineering organizations that run hackathons or campus drives and want screening in the same tool.

Pricing

Tiered plans are listed on HackerEarth's pricing page. Our checker could not load that page, so confirm current figures on the live page rather than trusting a third-party summary.

13. HackerRank

HackerRank is the veteran developer-screening platform: coding tests, live pair-programming interviews and take-home projects, with plagiarism detection and IP tracking. Like Codility, it fills Alva's coding gap and nothing else.

Key features

• Coding assessments across dozens of languages, from algorithms to debugging and domain problems.
• Live interview environment and take-home projects in one workflow.
• Plagiarism detection, IP tracking and time-violation alerts.

Pros

• Deep technical content and a candidate experience developers already know.
• Integrates with major ATS platforms.

Cons

• No personality, cognitive or non-technical assessments.
• Priced for engineering organizations; overkill for one developer hire a year.

Best for

Companies hiring developers continuously who want the platform candidates already recognize. Our HackerRank alternatives list goes deeper on this segment.

Pricing

Tiered plans are listed on HackerRank's pricing page. Our checker could not load that page in September 2026, so confirm current figures directly rather than trusting a third-party summary.

14. TestInvite

TestInvite is exam software you build yourself: a flexible test builder, many question types, lockdown and AI-driven cheating detection, and scoring you can reshape after the fact. It is the choice when your assessment is proprietary and you just need a secure place to run it.

Key features

• Custom test creation with configurable scoring logic, norms and score categories.
• Template library for common skills alongside your own tests.
• Lockdown browser, randomization and AI cheating detection.

Pros

• Free sign-up with 100 testing credits and no card.
• Every standard plan includes 500 credits a year.

Cons

• You do the authoring. There is no certified psychometric library to lean on.
• Starter caps you at 250 questions, 5 tests and 1 teammate.

Best for

Training providers, certifiers and employers with an in-house test they need to deliver securely.

Pricing

Starter $900 a year, Essential $1,900, Advanced $2,900, Pro $3,900, Premium $6,000, Premium+ $35,000; Enterprise is custom.

15. eSkill

eSkill is a long-running pre-employment testing platform with a large subject bank and a custom-test builder that lets you assemble a test subject by subject. It covers hard skills, soft skills, cognitive aptitude, behavioral and personality assessments.

Key features

• A subject bank you can draw from to build a role-specific test.
• Interactive job simulations alongside standard questions.
• Behavior monitoring for copy-paste and tab switching.

Pros

• Unusual depth for building a role-specific test from existing items.
• Personality and behavioral coverage, unlike the coding-only tools.

Cons

• Quote-based pricing with no self-serve trial; the path is "Talk to sales."
• No published entry price, which makes it hard for a small team to budget.

Best for

Mid-size employers that want a highly customized test bank and are fine with a sales process.

Pricing

Quote-based. No prices are published; demos are booked through sales.

Pro Tip: Before you switch, export the last 50 Alva results and note how many hiring decisions actually changed because of the logic or personality score. If the answer is under five, the psychometric screen is not doing the work you are paying for, and the money is better spent on a role skills test the hiring manager will read.

Which Alva Labs alternative is best for your team?

Pick by hiring pattern, not by feature count. Three patterns cover most readers of this page.

You hire across roles at a company under 200 people. Take an all-in-one platform with published pricing: Testlify first, TestGorilla if you want a free tier to start. Picture a 90-person marketing agency in Amsterdam that hires 8 account managers, 4 designers, 3 analysts and 2 developers a year and screens about 25 applicants per role (an illustrative case, not a customer). That is roughly 425 assessments. On Testlify's Basic plan that is $3,348 a year for 300 credits plus 125 extra credits at $14, about $5,100, and each invite can bundle a cognitive test, a role skills test and a short personality inventory. Set that against SHRM's 2025 benchmark of $5,475 average cost per non-executive hire (SHRM, 2025): the whole year of screening costs less than one hire.

You hire developers, mostly. Codility, HackerRank, HackerEarth or Coderbyte will out-test any generalist on code, and Coderbyte is the cheapest way in. Alva's 60 to 90 minute take-home is a reasonable final round; none of these replace it for a senior hire, but all of them screen 80 applicants faster.

You are a European scale-up hiring at volume. This is Alva's home market, and the fit question is really a compliance question. The EU AI Act lists AI systems "intended to be used for the recruitment or selection of natural persons" as high-risk in Annex III, point 4(a), which is why "can a human override the score?" belongs in your vendor questionnaire. Alva's transparent report (candidate and recruiter see the same thing) is a good answer. So is a platform that lets you exclude AI scores from the final average and routes questions to a named human reviewer. If you also hire in New York, Local Law 144 already requires a bias audit within a year of using an automated employment decision tool and a candidate notice 10 business days before use, enforced since 5 July 2023 (NYC DCWP).

The labour-market backdrop makes this sharper. Eurostat put the euro area job vacancy rate at 2.3% in the first quarter of 2026, up from 2.2% the quarter before (Eurostat, 2026). Fewer open roles per applicant means more applicants per role, and more applicants is the volume that a two-test screen plus a human-run interview loop struggles to absorb.

More evidence sits in our skills-based hiring statistics and in how psychometric tests predict job performance.

See Testlify on your own roles

The fastest way to compare is to run one real role through both. Take a role you last screened with Alva, build the same screen in Testlify from the test library during the 7-day free trial, and send both to the same three shortlisted candidates. If you already run an ATS, check the integrations list first. Or book a demo and we will build the assessment with you. Our Testlify vs Alva Labs comparison has the feature-by-feature detail.

Key Takeaways

• Alva Labs is a psychometric screen, not a hiring platform. Two certified adaptive tests, a take-home coding challenge and interview guides for humans, delivered into 250+ ATS and HR systems at a price you learn on a demo. That is the right buy for a logic-plus-personality process and the wrong one for role skills at volume.
• Coverage is the hidden decision. Job knowledge tests (.40) and work samples (.33) predict performance as well as or better than cognitive ability (.31) in the 2022 Sackett re-analysis, so a tool that only measures logic and personality leaves signal on the table. Choose a platform that can collect several signals per candidate.
• Published pricing separates the small-team tools from the enterprise ones. Testlify, TestGorilla, Adaface, TestDome, Coderbyte, Codility and TestInvite publish prices. Alva, Mettl, iMocha, HireVue, Vervoe, eSkill and HireMojo do not. Run your own volume through the published ones before you book a demo with the others.
• Coding-only platforms are not general alternatives. Codility, HackerRank, HackerEarth and Coderbyte replace Alva's coding test and nothing else. Pair them with a generalist or pick a generalist that includes coding in a real editor.
• Compliance is now a feature question. Recruitment AI is high-risk under the EU AI Act's Annex III, and NYC Local Law 144 already requires bias audits and candidate notice. Ask every vendor whether a human can override the AI score and whether the candidate sees the same report the recruiter does.
• Keep a human on the decision. Whatever the AI score, the flag or the percentile says, a person should make the call, and the better platforms make that a setting rather than a promise.

FAQs